A CAREFUL ANALYSIS

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLI, Issue XLI, 15 October 1921, Page 4

A CAREFUL ANALYSIS

One of the best speeches delivered in the House for a long time was.that ot ]Vlr O. J. Hawken, member for fcgmont, in the Address in Keply clebato, andlab it will no doubt be read with »«ter^ "w© publish the Hansard report. Mr HTHpeX dr; I will follow the pleasant custom of the House and oongratu ate the mover ami seconder of the Address in Reply on their speeches. I do.not intend to traverse the matter o£ their snaeches there are one or two JSSte feloh 1 would-Jkß to touch Spon. The mover of ..the Address m Reply mentioned particularly the necessity for providing the back country sett ers with roads and telephones. I SSJ mlmbera always clao their hands when they hear about the back «mntry ttTsetk 1 vTQS Xv the Settlers there perhaps as well m anybody in this House, and I, say. Sir, that the lot of these mei,i andl women has been a very hard one. When the late war broke out 1 suppose that no other part of .our population tort w many ot its able workers as the back Xtry did, and nothing!«J done lo them during the war. when the war SS over *uen in the back country were ™trem3y scarce, and the work could no<Kb# done, and now when tunesi ar« difS&t and. money is scarce theaetnen, I believe - will be again neglected, s . JoSSSr/Sir, that thfcrt> is ■onjWog wrong w\th our system of gjwtjj^o^the ! real^lp from any Government,> and i» they could get even less than they have Sceived, but got it more•regular--1 fy I. believe it would be much better. But it is heartbreaking to a lot pt these men and women to be V^f ' the position of waiting year aftei-year ' and not to have a decent road or means f if. communication with the outer worid - such as other people have, I ™^» in regard to telephones that the Master at present m charge has done n»» for the back country settler than any Government in this country ever did, for although in the past we haje,had * good many promises he has done the most in supplying the back country with telephones, and 1 hope this policy -will be continued, for if anybody xs .eneatitled to help in this direction^ jis the back country settlers, and I thinK that is the. pohcy of the Minister. Now, in regard to a matter which has attracted ft good deal of attention, and .which-Vas mentioned by the seconder of the Address in Reply, the member for Temnfca.- I refer to the conditiqiv oj the runs in the South island. I had the pleasure of making a trip through 4 the South Island during the recess wip * several other North Island members, "t and it struck me very forcibly that *■■■ something would have to be done^ to

alter the tenure af those runs ,in the South Island. The member for TfemaKa understands the position perhaps as few do, having lived in the hill coantxy or the South Island, and having -no; fioubt studied this question from the beginning. It strikes me that the reason why the South Island is not making the progress that it should is tiecause the land tenures of a great deal of the country are put of date and not as they should be, and I, believe that until that state of affairs is altered the South Island will not progress as jt should progress in comparison with the North Islands It struck me that there* : vks a' great deal ot country, area of country, in the South Island that vwas being ill-used and ill-managed, and ■ 1 confess that I came to the conclusion « it ww very largely due to the tenure. that rmohey:shpujid be spent in • experimenting on that land. It seemea I': to me that the isoil waa i?oM, t?urt that ■>• the whole be |earched for t plants^^thafc-w^ul^g^ow'-more.-.-reidiiy on the ground. Money should be spent in such a way carrying capacity of the ground should be increased ' TEan, redaced, as is being done • ihd has been done for many years past. '% For ;i> hat reason; i, commend to the I>o«tn Island; members particularly, city I irien as well as country men, that the alteration of the tenure of- those lands v is one of the, important things for the I Sb>th Islands v.Coming-to the subject ; of the debate, the^mover of the amend;,V nieni gave his. reasons why he things .': the Government has no longer the^conv fidence of - the-country; He considers i that the, Government never had the X confidence of the country, that it was i -not; supported by a maojrity of the i voters: "• ■-.'■ : ■■■-■■/■:': •'.■ - .■■■'■ ■.'■■■ , r " ■ • Mi" "Wilford: Dojou deny that? Mr Hawken: JFust waffc a moment. "He set out the particulars. ;He gave us tbe forces he had at his command, horse, foot arid artillery; and he made ;he had a- great deal bigger force thatn we had. I want to remind , the honourable, member- that there is :suqh a thing as generalship; that it is v .no good having a huge army unless you Xuse/it rightly;-^that ihls '\ country does 'iiiot. want a leader 'of a multitude who '^"dbes not know how use that multi- ..-. tude. hlt wants< a man who knows how ;ib use the forces *t his command. Tn pother: words, it wants "a jreal general . I x»hfess ihat it seems to me that the great^ Liberal party has lacked generalship> for a very long time. Why is it that their forces are so disunited!'' :* THere are about five parties in the one, 1 and it.seems, to me that if the leaderships, has been good the party should have stuck together. There are reasons; there must be reasons .' iVt - :^Mr;^Wiliord-r'-If Mr Massey Went ■■ out of of fice your -party, would break up into .'..,>... " ;.. ■pr3^^Hawken'?^)d not<yoii-worry about: "Uiat. ■ iThere at€> reaspns why your should^ h^aye^ Split; up into; -the many parts it is in ndirl Evidently the : poKey 'wliicli^hasil^h^pttrsued by the : Xiberial party f or^ many years past has not' suited the people. I have some figures; here;which may be interesting to tb^HbuieJ as it seems to i&e that; , theyf lutnish. ptie of tne reasons why V the Idberal^party has riot suited thaii portion of the- constituency which thejr '' hare always pretend. tp^ have) or think they- have, iri their particular Ttte ; ith;6ught to take ojit; vthese figures ypccurred to me when^theiieader of the?; /Opposition threw 6ut tlie old jib© about i favouring the^ rich man. I think that / thevLabpur party will.admit that Gus*toHXs:duty is supposed tp:bepaidiby the pborVman- It is paid by the>whole of populatipii, prvcqwrse^but-the Labpeople "regard at 'as their particular ./tax',' x ana';land arid',iricpme ta,x as being |^&yd:by the:';riebJ--:''mari.x;:Let. us look at figures for land an<i inconie tax and duties Jor f some yiears Back, let us see on whom these taxes., r!alleri;v? In: 1905, the last 'year fw&n jbtieJ latek-Richard Seddori- Bad the; Treasury, we; find that l^^stoiris and' beer duty amounted to |i51j728^193, vand that'land and income *9l!Bc "iri^th^'Sahie- year .amounted, to £606,704^ That is to say, about a quarter of the taxation was paid .by the ---lidi. man and three-quarters by the poor tnan. W© come down now to the year JtWl, tfce last year in which Sir Joseph

Ward had command at the Treasury, We find in that year Customs and excise amounted to £3,145,927 and, lanu and income tax to £1,035,958. Mr. Wilf6rd: What surplus was there in that year , . , Mr. Hawken: I dare sayUhe rich man had a good surplus in that year. The position then was that the rich man paid about one-third of theso taxw», which are the two heaviest groups 01 taxes we levy, and the poor man paid two-thirds. Now, lot us come down to the present time, and we find that this Government, which is supposed to favour the rich man, taxes in this way: land and income-tax in this year amounts to £9,937,924 and customs to £8,769,251. But I.will give the figures for last year, because I think the whole House will admit that customs revenue this year has reached a figure which it never before reached, and which is in every way extraordinary. Last year (the year 1920) customs amounted to £5.600,079, and land and income tax to £7,927,667. Those figures show, without doubt, that the gibe which has been thrown over the floor of tbe-House about the Government favouring the rich man is unwarranted, and does not come too well from the Liberal party. I want to add to tho figures already given, and draw the attention of tho House to the fact that stamp-duties and death-duties in the days when tho late Richard John Seddon Was in his pnmo —and I am not casting any reflection on him, because in his day he was a great leader —but times have changed, and it seems to me that thisj side of the House has taken on the role of advanced legislation which in thos«j earlier days was claimed by the Liberal party. Death duties and stamp duties this year amount to no less a sum than £3 745,902. That is an enormous sum, ■ and if one added to it the laud and income tax the difference in the incidence of taxation would be tremendous —still greater than that already quoted. Last year these duties and stamp duties amounted to £3,344,933. in 1905 theso duties Vere looked upon as being so small— amounting only to a little over a quarter'of a millipn; iri fact they were looked upon as almost -negligible Clearly, therefore, s there is a tremendous difference in the incidence of tho taxation of the country to-day to what it was a few years ago. It is clear to my mind that in respect to the claim mado by the Liberal party to the effect that this Government favour* the rich man is entirely without foundationFigures talk, and as a rule fi^urea talk sense. The figures which I have mentioned will prove, to some, at any rate, that this Government has done its besj; to make the incidence of taxation equitable to "poor and rich alike. Now. I want to say something respecting the £17,000.000 about which there has b'aan so much talk—that is the £17,000,000 that was saved out of tho country's finance and spent—or squandered, as the leader of tne Opposition terms it— on otiir returned soldiery. Wilfordt No; no; on the, large landowners -.r .. : !:\--^ " Mr Hawken: We did not spend the £17,000,000 on large landowners. That sum went in furniture for men and also put them into smell businesses. • // Mr-Wilford: Altogether £22,000.000. Mr Hawken: Buying houses for the men, and also In buying land for them.

men, and also m "Duymg tana xor mem. If it was squandered; well, then, I wish ■ we had niore to squander in 6uch a good cause. The settlement of the soldiers' claims is one one of the brightest spots in the records of the history of this . country. I believe that the settlement of the soldiers' claims is a monumental •*• credit tj the present Government. Whejv X wag speaking at Hastings at the^asi-electitins I declared rigain and againi that.any Government who could satisfactorily settle our soldiers' claims during thjs term of Parliament, if they achieved nothing else, they would de-. ' serve: well of the country. I think: I can claim, and sit is generally acknwr ':'lodged, that the soldiers' claims have been settled. I do not mean to say that every; soldier's claim has been set? tied, but irbm the criticism that is put forward, which, ia a good guide, I do say* ttiat the g^eat bulk: of the soldiers Athhit that their claims have been-met. and that the Government has done as well as possibly could be done in their interests. Mr Wilford: You mean they keep them going in spite of the price they •■~pay?'-'' ■ ■'■ '.-. - ■•■'■•■■• "■ .-~ '■ •• Mr Hawken: The price they paid for the land was the price that other people would have had to pay. It was the market price. I have seen a great many of the estates during my travels round the.North Island and the South Island during the recess. I have a pretty good knowledge of the value of land, and I contend that in a. great many eases the owners must have given the Wei to the soldiers for less than its then value, although it has never been acknowledged. In fact, I know of cases where men have offered their estates for less than the market value and nave not said a word about it. Of <wmrse mistakes were made,.but in very many oases the soldiers got good value tor their money. - An hon.^member: "What about McCutchen's? > ! ■■■■• Mr Hawkeri- The difficulty in connection with* McCutchen's land was that it was not suitable. I do not say ■for: a moment that the land was not 1 worth the money the Government gavo: tor it; but some parts of it were mot 'suitable for the purposes intended: -■ Mr Wilford: Whose fault was that ? ' Mr Hawken: No one spends £24,000,----000 without making a few mistakes. Mr Wilford: Whose fault was that ? Mf Hawken: Possibly the fault of the ■ manWho bought the land. The fact of the matter is that there were many men in that part of the country who wanted (this particular class of land, and it was dif ficut to say to those men *'You come out and pick a piece of land * for "*,dairyf arm;" .iW^, are;-trying to cater for the whole of the men without /leaVirigfi anybody out if we can possibly : help it. '■■'■ ' % ''- •' Mr Holland: How much, of the £24,----000.000 has been; lost? V; .. , Mr. Hawken: If we lose a small proportion of that money,'it was out own -money. ,to losfe. It was not borrov^ed money. I' "cannot understand, Mr. . v.Speater, \vhyxthere is so much -talk, about; What ought to have been done Witt %atf£l7,ooo,ooo of surpluses, It fhar been' stated during this debate that We money should Lav© .been left in "'. London, , and ' some; financial jugglery ehould have been worked so v #e could have borrowed mdny morvi mH- ' lions, one member suggesting; £40,000,----000 Well; sir, if there is one thing we nave to Be,thankful for it ig that we did not go in for that system, of finance, that we had a leader at the head of affairs who kept his head and went on sound".commonssnsfcj:lines. I believe that the soldiers inj! time to come . will Teap a tremendous bon<?fit from -tike fact that:*he money jivas equal ■ to cash in hand,, -and there -no oiitgpirig which wS. would have to pay if-we 'ibad' borrowed thei: moneyi pmside^ the. Dominion^ To many pebple the matter. Of finance is 'a ye^ry intricate question, ■ -fejit' I believe- in the old style of,' pay ■ •as :you.v;go. andV pay cash if yon can.' Some people' pay their debts of honour as soon as" they can, others pay thrtu -after all their other debts, an.l sonio-'dov not pay them at all. I consider that; th© present Government hay© none their best to pay their debt of honour to tie '

soldiers as quickly as possible, and I believe they have succeeded. Now. sir, I want to express my view as to the actual position of the country, and to say what, in my opinion, ought to be done. The Leader of the Opposition found fault with the Government on the ground .of its extravagance. Well, 1 wish I could think that all that ailed the country was that the Government is a little bit extravagant. That ca.i be eaitly' cured. The Loader of the Opposition mentioned two or dace instances —some fishing nets and two or three other things, and he promised that there would bo a good many nhoHs from the Opposition benches following up his remarks. We were going to be biown to pieces as far as I could make out. But most of the shells have been duds as far as 1 can see. Now, coming to the question of the comont, it seems to me that that was a matter for the Board of Trade, and not a matter for this Hquob at all. I have no doubt that had the honourable member lor Stratford brought it beforo the Board of Trade months ago, there would have been inquiry mado, and due precautions would have boen taken. Dr. Thack'er: It would have been like the sugar-—too late for the jam. Mr. Hawken: The honourable membnr need not worry about the sugar. We haro made something for the country out of that deal. But until it is proved that a combine is at work, what, enn ■the Government do?.-I understand that tho price of cement has boen lowered since this combination took pla*"e, and it is yery difficult i© prove any rest! nint of ityad^ when in reality they have low©redFths price, 7t seems to i..c th»t wei shafiHbave to .suspend-jiulgnu.nt on .this charge until the inat'.or is mvcftigated;; arid I feel that i:i the iirat place lfc should have heen referrej to the Jtoardof Trade, PersonuJy, I UJwve in trie end the charge will hardly be sustained. An hon, member: You me not serous, are you ? M& *IQEawkon: I am quite serious abouvthat. Now; sir, it senna to me that trie difficulty we ere ?n\ is due to our income as a country being lower tUan out, expenditure. \Ve have btcn trying Jfor a long time to match our expenditure with our income, but perhaps it would be just as well now for us-io try and make our expenditure match'our income. It cannot be done by' 4 little paring off bere and there t it, must bo faced in a way that is bcld because tho income of the'country undoubtedly has falton to a gy:eatop estent than the Opposition side' v?ity admit. I have listened to tho Various %<ets of figures that have been put |6r#ard during thia debate, as \ghowift£ !he income of the country and th©jpTices received for our great staple ppoauee»j»:'-w001,.-meat, butter, and cheese. Now, sir, I trunk we ere to hq t cojigra£ulated upon having the small fatrmoj, m this country. He has saved the situation again, as he has done in every country in the world, at times. I^elieve that the small farmer in New inland —especially the . email dairy fi&nep—has, 'daring these last few years, s^ved- the situation and largely, carried the country on his back. Ido pot know what would have happened if th&vsriiaU farmer had not received the. go^S prices that he has been paid for hw^broduce. * : • ♦■' Mr. S. G. Smith: We want more of them. ~ -.-'..

them. ... . ;; > llr::"Hawken: Yes. The position of 'i"h©>i:-wool-growing industry is not a cheerful one, I happen to be connected \ with-it to a certain extent, and I can say that tfopl which we sold last year for 15d per pound, and which before the "war brought an average of lOd per pound, has ;*beeri sold recently for mont»^*.fpr saleiaffcer sale, for less than* 4d MR^bjin^i barely a quarter of whatz we KrseeiV<ps for it during i vfS^'inlfti| Nat\ftally. that reduces the meom^&r the^ipamunity io a very large; extenxj. . I befreve that last year, in \votoV'mms&, we.were £10 f QQO,QQQ behind ou£ incomer, for the previous year, and that our ih-'j borne-from woql is very largely below j what-it was in pre-war years. The? same applies to our income from out meat, . I believe that the figures; quoted.. bjv. %%e& honourable member for- /Wairarapa are correct, and that somewhat of ' a misconception has arisen on account^] >of ihe.figures given out. I believe that] { .pur income from wool and meat.showed i an enormous drop.. The reduced in-;! com© of the Dominion from these; sources—with other products, such' asi ' .tallow and hides—probably amounts to 25 per cent., that is, judged by the' figures for the previous year or pre-war | years. Kow, sir, I want to put this ■ position: Is.it possible to pay1 wages, which are baaed on the full income when-! that income declines 25 per cent,? f! say it. is impossible, and I think there should be an all-round decrease in the income of the people. I believe that j the rich man should tome in, and, starting from- the House itself, you, should-go right through the Civil Ser-j vice ""and reduce incomes. 'I wish Ij could believe that this fall in the in-1 come of"the Dominion is but a temporary priS 1 know that a good many peoplesHbink that things will be all right again soon, but as far, as wool is concerried-r-though I believe that it is improving in price—it has got a long way to.go before.it reaches the"pre-war j .figure., j[ believe the price'of wool will . go; up, because it is below the normal-j point. "Then, again, no man can say j that"; butter *and cheese are going to j keep up to their present prices, because j ,2s per. pound for butter is not normal, and the ; probability is that as wool goes • up", in. -pHCe butter-»and cheese will come . do'vt'n. it have pointed out the great decrease there Ins been in the income derived •from • the great industries, and the difficulty of keeping on at the same, rate pf ', pay, in the Public Service. The incpmeVitas decreased ;to avery large' extent, there are other difficulties which were unforeseen, which render the-,.,position even more difficult. For instance, we imoorted into this country during the last'year £35,000,000 worth of,goods too much, that is more than ordinary, and all that money had to be found. That in itself straiiied the resources of the money-lending institutions, and on top of that the farmers found that their live' stock had de-. creased in; value to, a very great extent. I think I should be quite safe in saying be found that the farmers' live stock has decreased in value to the extent of. ■. from- £25,000,000 to £30,000,000 sterling n ., and has' left them with little money to carry on with, even if they cold,- and there-is no doubt the position is ;» very awkward one. lam not | one of those whp take a delight in seeing men out of employment, or in giving nien the "sack," to. put it in the popular;phras©. Always during my life, ever since I starred in business, I have emploj^ed' men, and the hardest thing I have, .had to do was to give a man his dismissal. Even now it is only with the very grayest sense of responibility that I.sajrl^thinkthe wages ,of working men' shbuld.be vbrptight down.. But we have a responsibility,' sir, I consider, in this House.that is similar to. that of trustees •with, regard to the Eublic Service. If want to point out that there are above..:, 30,000 in the -Public Service of the j; country,... but outside of that service there are^& 'great ina.ny iV workers who ; ihaye .already had their pay reduced, a 1 Wery ; large number of them — not so.' ' mticbi|irvth 7e dairying indu&try, perhaps, but #iyther other branches of farming. I thing-L;should be quite safe 'In saying that thesesthen have met the question, afjter discussing it .'with their employers, they. org;>»ow receiving, perhaps, 20 per ceriiptfess^wages than they were getting

twelve months ago. and I think it is hardly fair that wo should keep th*. rat© of pay in the Government service j when wo are paying the wages really! out of the taxation which wo are levj - in X upon the employers of other labour. It seems, sir, that it is not Cair to labour throughout the country, it means that the farmer has to dismiss his man, perhaps because he has to pay a, heavy tax. 1 consider that all should face the po&ition together; that is my contention. I have profound faith in the country, and if wo face the position together I believe New Zealand will be all right, and that wages wiil shortly up again. But if the Public Service, is to bo kept up at the expense of the rest of the community, including the labouring community, then we are going to get into a very difficult position. I wish to draw attention to the Railways Statement. It is evident to anyone who looks at it in an impartial way that the real difficulty is that the labour coat of running the railways is too great, the consequence being that they cannot be made to pay. Wo are up against a choice of two evils—either : dismiss men and curtail the service, or/reduce the running cost. I am inclined to think the best way is to reduce all round, from the top to the bottom, which would be far more satisfactory than to see a number of men out of employment. I am satsified, too, it would bo more equitable to tackle the Public Service ana put all the employees on an equality with the other workers of the Dominion. A point that will make thtngg much more difficult is this: It is probably a point that would be overlooked. During the war the Government combed out every poßsible avenue from^ which to derive revenue, and it is evident that in order to "get money into the Treasury now there -are very few channels from which we can derive extra revenue.. I am very much t impressed with the fact that the people cannot stand the taxation they are paying to-day. I believe jt is having a bad effect on employment and on enterprise, and if it js possible at all we should reduce taxation, instead of increasing it, which we may have to do if we are going to keep up the present rates of paty. If possible, we should find fiorae other avenue of taxation, though I think all the channels are about exhausted. That, at any rate, is one of t the difficulties. Ordinarily, in bad times, there are channels of taxation which may be utilised, but at present I do not see where the Finance Minister is to go. Sir, I like to face a position, and so far as I can see the suggestions from the other side are not facing the position. The suggestion that the position can be righted by saving a Htt'e out of extravagances is, to my mind, :i\M a sound one.' We. will have to go a good deal deeper, and the country, I.think, is demand'ng it. I consider, sir, we may congratulate, ourselves on ihe fact that in many ways we have occupied the position we have, but at the same time' the serious drop in the income derived from the ereat industries has made it imnerative that the subject should be dealt with, and that the people should be told it is necessary to make their expenditure balance their income. If things go on too. long as they are at present, we shall be in a difficult position. If tackled straight away then, within a short time, the country will rise again, and we will lie the same prosperous people we 'have been for many years past.